Where is the realism?

[Brightblade]

In a PBEM nightbattle at snow, max. LOS 60m, I recieved a file today and I just can´t believe what happened there.

One of my veteran T-34/85 hunts to an assault gun (maybe a StuH 42) and aquires target at 58m. So far, so good.

Fire. Missed. OK, have to accept that in the game, it´s pretty unrealistic at that distance while neither target nor shooter are moving, but it happened in CMBO (e.g. with a Crack Panther at 47m in daylight) and it happened in other CMBB battles before and it´s night, bad visibility etc.

Second shot. Missed! Alright, the gunner seems to have a pretty bad day (the target continues to fire at its area target next to my T-34 so it´s not that bad yet).

Third shot. Missed!! Don´t know for sure what I would have done as TC of that absolute imbecile of a gunner, but I guess it wouldn´t have been nice! The target finally notices that it´s being shot at, so it aims at my T-34, shoots, front turret penetration, no serious damage. What a relieve.

Fourth shot. MISSED!!!

Movie clip ended here and I have to wait for the next file to find out about the hit chances, but this is ridiculous! A tank crew with a gunner like this one could never have achieved veteran status! I don´t know how bad Russian optics were, but at that distance the target must have filled the whole sight of the gunner, so missing would have been pretty impossible!

Don´t misunderstand me, I really love the game. It´s definitely the best tactic game available and very realistic in many aspects, but BTS, please fix or do somefink!

[ January 15, 2003, 05:30 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

[Panzer76]

What can I say... such a thing would only happen once in a blue moon. I have never experienced something like that. Though luck! But Im sure you have alternative ways to dispose of that tank, as yours is toast for sure!

[Vanir Ausf B]

Although rare, such things can and did happen in real life. As long as this is rare in the game, there is nothing to fix.

[Bruno Weiss]

I'd say the realism is right there. Were the game as predictable as Stratego then it wouldn't be very real aye? Things happen in combat with infinate variables, accidents, unplanned events, breakdowns, missed shots, opportunities lost and gained, and an endless list of complications. IMO realism is unpredictable.

[MrSpkr]

Consider this -- perhaps your gun sights are off, and given the conditions, your gunner can't tell where the shots are landing. HE fires -- a miss -- a muttered curse. He fires again -- another miss -- a louder curse. He takes careful aim for the third shot -- misses -- the gunner realizes the sights aren't true -- "T'voyu maht"! The gunner realizes he has to adjust this time, but isn't sure in which direction and at what distance this sights are off -- sweating now, he makes a slight adjustment based on the limited information he has -- another miss -- the gunner, speechless, pales noticeably in the dim light of the tank interior.

Or maybe not, who knows?

Steve

[laxx]

Congratualations! You Won one of those "butter-finger" gunners in the TacAI calculations which occurs in 1 in a Million games.

This is part of a 3-easter egg combination. first being the Klutz Gunner, second which is even more rare is the Brittle-As-Eggshell-SturmTiger, and the third I forget, something about a HamsterGruppen screen saver.

LOL!

[Michael Emrys]

Look at it this way, BB: it's your karma. All the sins of your misspent youth are finally catching up to you. Now you know what the rest of your life is going to be like!

Michael

[Brightblade]

@ Vanir: Have you ever been inside a tank? I have to admit, I only know modern tanks and modern optics, although modern emergency optics are quite the same like WW2 main optics. I very much doubt that a tank ever missed a target at that distance. If it had been moving - OK, maybe; if the shooter had been moving - quite likely without stabilizer; but both, target and shooter stood still during all four shots.

I would bet anything I possess that such a thing never ever happened in real life.

@ Bruno Weiss: You are right, the game should not be too predictable. But even in real life some things are predictable. Missing that often at that distance is simply unrealistic. Even the first shot at that distance - given it´s night, snowing and Russian optics are not so good - should have a hit chance of at least 80%. Any one following should have 100%.

@ MrSpkr: Same question as before: Have you ever been inside a tank? Have you ever looked through tank optics? They may be a bit off, of course. At higher distances, say 500m and more, something like what you described might happen. But at a distance of 58m the optic may be as far off as possible, through the very limited field of view it is virtually impossible to miss once, let alone twice or four times as in my case.

But let´s assume the gunner was suddenly struck blind by a god, at that distance the commander could try a shot from the hip, aiming just by the end of the barrel, and had a good chance to hit. Or he could tell the loader to aim through the barrel, just before he loads the next round.

@ Michael emrys: Yours is the most likely explanation of the phenomenon. I thought I already had paid for my misdoings, but it seems like I was wrong there

Maybe I should just end my miserable life and try anew

[ January 15, 2003, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

[Moon]

60 meters with night and snowfall is quite a distance, which I think is mainly responsible for the poor performance. Think of this as the target being barely visible (or not visible at all and the gunner aiming for where he thought he saw a muzzle flash). It seems to me that this is a situation at the extreme end of visibility, and all sorts of weird results can happen there. BTW, did he overshoot or undershoot? Maybe there is a little crest which caused early impact?

Martin

[rune]

BB,

Bet taken. What do you want to lose? Then will post where an american tank stationary missed at point blank range, and an account where a German did the same thing a couple times in a row. Matter of fact, I believe someone posted an account here on the forums earlier, but do not recall the thread. The surprise and panic when a tank shows up that close could happen, not often mind you, but never say never.

Rune

[Phantom Captain]

Brightblade,

Sturm died an honarable death as well!

That's all one can do sometimes. Although his was against overwhelming odds.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by Brightblade:

I would bet anything I possess that such a thing never ever happened in real life.

I would bet anything I possess that it has happened many times in real life.

I recall one documented instance where an AT gun misses something like 5 or 6 shots in a row at a tank 50m away. It was posted on this forum last year.

[ January 15, 2003, 09:42 AM: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[rune]

Vanir is correct, I also found this thread from the old days:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/004572-3.html

Has a lot of useful information from people who do the shooting for a living.

Rune

[Vanir Ausf B]

Ah, the old neon-aqua forum. And to think we thought it was pretty cool at the time...

[aka_tom_w]

I have been waiting and watching for a thread like this since CMBB was introduced.

Guess what? :confused:

This is the FIRST and only (that I know of) thread if its kind where someone has questioned the "chance to hit" calculations.

%99.99 of all threads and comments are not about complaints regarding this aspect of the game.

One of the new words I learned when I first started reading the CMBO forum was the word "outlier" (is that correct?). This is a reference to a datum (fact or point on a curve) on the far end of a spectrum of data. What you are reporting is IMHO on outlier.

It has been previously explained as poor visibility which also makes sense.

It would seem most folks posting here are MORE than happy with CMBB "chance to hit" calculations!

(I think)

-tom w

[xerxes]

Outlier indicates a data point outside the "normal" distribution. This incident was probably just from the far tail of the distribution. Not really an outlier.

When your tanker or AT guns screws up it's frustrating, quite understandably.

[hardcampa]

I understand the other tank was closer. But then again it wasn't daytime or anything so here it comes, from the old post:

Just the other day I was reading an account of a Sherman tank whose commander told the gunner "Target tank, 800 yards, open fire!" So he did. The shell sailed over the target. "700 yards!" shouted the commander. That shell flew overhead as well. "600 yards!" again, overshot. "500! JESUS!!" Overshot again. Finally they hit the German tank at something like 350 yards. The German tank was not moving during the whole affair - it was simply a gross misjudgement of the range. This factor alone is enough to keep hit probabilities a lot lower than you suggest.

=)

[ January 15, 2003, 10:53 AM: Message edited by: hardcampa ]

[[UF]fridericus]

lol, hardcampa

seeing 350m and estimate 800m is nearly impossible for every man with eyes.

but it isnt important to have the right distance.

german weapons with up to 1000m/s shoot exactly enough.

with a miss-estimation of 300m you can hit as well as with the right distance.

[MrSpkr]

Originally posted by Brightblade:

@ MrSpkr: Same question as before: Have you ever been inside a tank?

Yes.

Have you ever looked through tank optics?

Yes.

They may be a bit off, of course. At higher distances, say 500m and more, something like what you described might happen. But at a distance of 58m the optic may be as far off as possible, through the very limited field of view it is virtually impossible to miss once, let alone twice or four times as in my case.

First, at night, 60m (about 180 feet) is quite a distance, particularly in a snowstorm. Frankly, I am surprised your guy could even see the enemy unit at that range, let alone tell if it was moving, sitting still, or guage in which direction the rounds were flying (as to misses - i.e., long, short, left, right, etc.)

But let´s assume the gunner was suddenly struck blind by a god, at that distance the commander could try a shot from the hip, aiming just by the end of the barrel, and had a good chance to hit. Or he could tell the loader to aim through the barrel, just before he loads the next round.

For the sake of argument, okay, first you yank the gunner out of the way. Then you try to spot the target through the optics in a snowstorm (bringing up another question -- had snow partially obscured the optics through buildup on the exterior?) Then you try to boresight -- making it even more difficult to see the target?

Nope, not seeing it. I think under the conditions you described (and remember, a World War II battlefield was a dark and chaotic place -- particularly where, as here, there is cloud cover blocking stars or moonlight, and falling snow) what happened was unlikely, but entirely possible.

Steve

[Scipio]

How about things like that :

Ammo/Gun/Optics with production errors

Drunken gunner

etc

[Brightblade]

Just a question to better understand: do atmosheric conditions aside from max. LOS influence the hit chance in CMBB?

If so I apologise for my statements.

In reality it is certainly very hard even to spot a tank at night with heavy snow, much harder to hit with all handicaps mentioned (stress, snow covered optics etc).

[Moon]

Yes, "exposure" degrades quicker in adverse weather conditions (you will notice that the color of the LOS tool gets darker quicker, which is an indication of that)

Martin

[JPS]

If maximum LOS is 60m and distance to target is 58m, the tank commander and or gunner are shooting at the shadows they think most likely to be the source of gun flashes. Moreover, given the visibility the tank commander and gunner can _believe_ they hit but did not penetrate even when they miss actually - so no re-aiming.

[Hortlund]

Countrary to popular belief (it would seem) range does not increase due to bad weather.

[Hortlund]

Heck at 58 meters you can look through the barrel and aim the gun that way and hit.